Unprecedented Presidency: Trump's Extreme Rhetoric and its Implications

Donald Trump is proposing an unprecedented second term in office that would deviate from American norms.

The ex-president, who may return to power, envisions himself as a strongman leader, aiming for complete control if he regains the presidency. He intends to seek retribution against his political adversaries and poses a profound threat to the principles of law and the Constitution in contemporary history. Trump also plans to undermine freedom of the press and dismantle crucial government institutions.

There is no speculation involved in this matter. Trump's intentions and actions are clearly expressed through his rallies, social media posts, interviews, legal documents, and even court appearances, where he constantly undermines the legal system. It is important to take Trump's ambitions seriously, especially since President Joe Biden's reelection chances are not secure, with only one year left till the election. An example of this can be seen in Trump's speech in New Hampshire on Veterans Day, where he opted to exacerbate national divisions instead of promoting unity.

Amidst a period of global turmoil, with conflicts persisting in Gaza and Ukraine and with China and Russia challenging US supremacy, Trump also resorted to a typical authoritarian motif. "The menace posed by external forces is far less insidious, perilous, and grave compared to the threat posed internally," he asserted.

Trump, known for his admiration of tyrants, is adopting a tactic commonly employed by them - targeting outsiders and immigrants in a venomous manner, using racially charged imagery. This echoes the language associated with White supremacy and political violence, elements that have become increasingly intertwined with his brand. In an interview with the right-leaning National Pulse website, he referred to undocumented migrants as "poisoning the blood of our country." Trump's rhetoric, particularly his use of the term "vermin," has prompted fresh comparisons between the former president and fascist dictators of the 1940s, as some media outlets and even Biden's camp have pointed out. "Donald Trump echoed the autocratic language of Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, two dictators whom numerous US veterans sacrificed their lives to defeat, in order to combat precisely the kind of un-American ideas that Trump now embraces," stated campaign spokesman Ammar Moussa.

It is true that Trump has adopted the rhetorical tactics used by despised dictators. He dehumanizes his political adversaries, discredits the legal, political, and electoral systems, demonizes the media, and uses vulnerable groups such as minorities and immigrants as scapegoats. Similar to other authoritarian leaders, he portrays himself as a persecuted savior fighting for the disenfranchised segment of society, which believes its traditional values and morals are under threat. However, comparing him to 1940s fascists risks simplifying America's current political reality, which cannot be compared to pre-World War II Europe.

If elected president, Trump would likely face significant obstacles from the US legal system, which is currently seeking to hold him accountable. Despite speculation about how he might use the military to suppress opposition, America has a non-political officer corps and safeguards in its constitution and laws. During his first term, the courts often curtailed or moderated Trump's radical objectives, especially regarding immigration. However, if he is reelected, he is expected to attempt to reinstate or expand some of his most popular policies, particularly on immigration. CNN's trusted source revealed that plans are being developed to apprehend undocumented immigrants and detain them in camps until deportation, a story initially reported by the New York Times.

Trump's critics inadvertently enhance his ability to incite outrage, which is crucial for his political appeal, by making dubious historical comparisons. Moreover, using inflammatory language to describe Trump's movement runs the risk of belittling his supporters, who hold equal voting power and have their own valid aspirations and concerns. Nonetheless, it is important to recognize that Trump's statements can still be deeply disturbing.

A unique modern demagogue

Throughout American political history, there have been numerous strongmen, demagogues, and extremists. However, none have come as close to implementing an agenda that fundamentally challenges the core principles of American democracy. Donald Trump is not merely a fringe political figure, but rather the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, surpassing his party's other candidates with two months remaining until the first votes are cast. Contrary to what one might expect, Trump's authoritarian tendencies have been embraced by millions of Republican voters, who genuinely believe his unfounded assertions that he was victorious in the previous election and that his impending criminal trials are nothing more than a politically motivated attempt to prevent him from attaining power.

Bidens challenges widen the consequences of Trump's radicalism. A recent CNN/SSRS poll indicates that in a hypothetical rematch, Trump holds a narrow lead over Biden, with only a quarter of the nation believing the president possesses the energy and mental acuity required for the role, including just half of Democrats. With families feeling the strain of rising costs, a palpable bitterness pervades the country.

Biden's campaign and top Democrats believe that once voters see the stark contrast between the current president and the previous chaotic authoritarianism, their decision will be easy. Others dismiss concerns over Trump, pointing out that previous Democratic presidents needed a political rebound to secure their second terms, and the election is still a year away. However, the stakes are much higher in 2024. Republican nominees Bob Dole in 1996 and Mitt Romney in 2012 were institutionalists who respected the Constitution and would have exercised presidential self-restraint, which is crucial for the proper functioning of the political system. On the contrary, Trump would undoubtedly push these principles to their most extreme limits.

Trump's defenders often argue that his words are not to be taken literally and that he often uses hyperbole to rally his supporters. However, this argument loses credibility following Trump's unprecedented denial of the election results in which he was rejected by voters. Furthermore, his call for supporters to "fight like hell" on January 6, 2021, was followed by the invasion of the US Capitol.

Trump continues to engage in violent rhetoric without restraint. His relentless attacks on judges, their staff, and prosecutors through both verbal statements and social media are filled with incitement, raising concerns for the safety and security of his targets.

The Republican Party has failed to rein him in. Presidential candidates who voiced criticism against Trump's unconstitutional tirades, such as former Vice President Mike Pence, have either abandoned their campaigns or, like former Governors Chris Christie and Asa Hutchinson, are languishing in the polls. Prominent GOP hopefuls like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley have only made indirect criticisms of Trump, recognizing that there is no political advantage within the modern Republican Party for confronting his disregard for the law. South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, who was promoting a more optimistic message for the GOP, ended his campaign on Sunday.

Should Trump become president-elect once more by this time next year, it would not be surprising to witness the type of administration he might bring forth.

Nevertheless, Trump's campaign team minimized recent reports about preparations for a second term, which included specific plans devised by conservative think tanks for a right-wing governing style. These plans involved utilizing the Justice Department as a weapon and reducing the effectiveness of the civil service. Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita, the campaign managers, released a statement dismissing these reports as mere speculation and theory. They emphasized that no external organizations held the authority to speak on behalf of the former president.

What Trump says he would do

But the ex-president is leaving no doubt about his desire to use a second White House spell to exact revenge against his political enemies and legal authorities.

"I am the embodiment of justice. ... I am the epitome of retribution," declared Trump to his supporters at the Conservative Political Action Conference in March, crafting a narrative that he faced persecution for defending his followers against government persecution.

Trump unequivocally signaled his intention to employ the Justice Department as a means to target his adversaries. As an example, he remarked in a recent Univision interview that the Biden administration had "unleashed the monster." Furthermore, during his appearance in New Hampshire on Saturday, he cautioned, "They did it to me, now I have the ability to reciprocate."

The ex-president's challenge to the Constitution is evident in his ongoing attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss and the events surrounding the Capitol insurrection. Continually, Trump presents new evidence that demonstrates his threat to constitutional order and the rule of law. In a Truth Social post in September, he accused then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, who has since retired, of committing a "treasonous act" by speaking with a Chinese general during the final days of his administration. Trump claimed that this act was so severe that, in the past, the punishment would have been death. Accusing political opponents of treason is a tactic commonly employed by tyrants, and Trump has embraced it once again, suggesting that he may attempt to suppress press freedoms during a possible second term. In another September Truth Social post, he warned that NBC News and MSNBC should be investigated for their alleged "Country Threatening Treason."

Trump has long held the mistaken belief that presidents have unlimited power, as evidenced by his actions following the last election. This perspective would undoubtedly guide any potential second term. In December of last year, he called for the dismantling of the Constitution so that he could be reinstated as president. Even while still in office, Trump frequently asserted that Article II of the Constitution granted him the authority to do "anything I wanted."

The argument made in the legal filings prior to Trump's criminal trials is that, as president, he had the right to exercise power as he pleased and should not be held accountable. Last month, Trump and his lawyers requested the judge overseeing the federal election interference trial to dismiss the charges based on presidential immunity. The filing claimed that the current administration had broken centuries of tradition by charging Trump for actions related to his official duties as president and argued that presidential immunity extended beyond his presidency. The notion that using executive authority to overturn an election is a valid exercise of power is highly disputed and could undermine the fundamental principle of equality under the law for all individuals in America, including presidents. Special counsel Jack Smith's team responded to Trump's request by stating that he was an unprecedented outlier, using language that could apply to many of his political actions and rhetoric.